Real judgements, distilled
Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreLegal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).
The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.
Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.
Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.
Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.
Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.
Shree Aashraya Infra-Con Limited underwent Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), and the appellant was appointed as its Resolution Professional. A resolution plan proposed by the company's promoters and approved by the Committee of Creditors was placed before the NCLT, Bengaluru, but the NCLT dismissed the application on the ground that the promoters were disqualified from presenting a plan under Section 29A of the IBC, relying on an NCLAT ruling that MSME status obtained only after CIRP had already begun could not cure the disqualification. Since this order effectively branded the Resolution Professional as having wrongly put forward a legally barred plan (with consequences for his eligibility to continue acting as one and possible referral to the insolvency regulator, IBBI), he appealed to the Supreme Court, which appointed an amicus curiae since no one represented the other side.
The Supreme Court first found that the specific disqualifications under Section 29A(c), (g), and (h) (aimed at promoters with unpaid non-performing-asset accounts, involvement in fraudulent transactions, or invoked guarantees) did not actually apply on the facts of this case at all. It then addressed the broader legal question referred by the amicus: whether Section 240A's exemption for micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) from certain Section 29A disqualifications requires MSME status to exist from the start of the insolvency process, or only by the time the resolution plan is submitted. Relying on its earlier ruling in ArcelorMittal v. Satish Kumar Gupta, which held that Section 29A(c)'s ineligibility attaches "at the time of submission of the resolution plan," the Court held that the same cut-off date applies to the MSME exemption under Section 240A, meaning MSME status can validly be obtained any time before the plan is submitted. It therefore held that the NCLAT's contrary view in the Digambar Anand Rao Pingle case was not the correct position in law, set aside the NCLT and NCLAT orders, allowed the appeal, and directed that no adverse action be taken against the appellant Resolution Professional.
When a law grants a special exemption based on a company's status (such as being a small business), what matters is whether that status exists at the legally relevant decision point (here, when the resolution plan is actually submitted) not necessarily from the very beginning of the process.
